AP calls government's record seizure a 'massive and unprecedented intrusion'

[jimmy olsen]

I have to agree with the AP on this one.

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/13/18234317-ap-calls-governments-record-seizure-a-massive-and-unprecedented-intrusion?lite

AP calls government's record seizure a 'massive and unprecedented intrusion'
By Michael Isikoff
National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department used a secret subpoena to obtain two months of phone records for Associated Press reporters and editors without notifying the news organization, a senior department official tells NBC News, saying the step was necessary to avoid "a substantial threat to the integrity" of an ongoing leak investigation.

The seizure of the phone records, disclosed earlier Monday by AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt, is the latest move in a series of high profile and controversial investigations of leaks of classified information by the Justice Department. In a letter of protest to Attorney General Eric Holder, Pruitt called said obtaining more than two months of AP phone records on 20 separate telephone lines without prior notice was a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into news-gathering operations.

It also drew a swift rebuke Monday from members of Congress and freedom of the press watchdogs, one of whom called the move "Nixonian."

Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., revealed in a letter to the AP on Friday that federal prosecutors obtained the records. The letter did not give a reason for obtaining the records, but Machen is conducting an investigation into the leak of classified information about a foiled terror plot in Yemen last year. An AP story last spring reported details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al Qaeda plot to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

In his letter to Holder, Pruitt said the seized phone records were from early 2012 and included phone lines for AP bureaus in New York, Washington DC, Hartford, Connecticut and the AP line at the House of Representatives. He said the records seized also included those from the home phones and cell phones of individual journalists.

"We regard this action by the Department of Justice as a serious interference with AP's constitutional rights to gather and report the news," Pruitt said.

Holder last June appointed Machen to conduct the investigation of the Yemen terror plot leak and Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney in Maryland, to oversee a separate probe into the leak of U.S. government efforts to use the Stuxnet computer virus to thwart the Iranian nuclear program. In later Senate testimony, Holder said that he and FBI director Robert Mueller had both been interviewed by FBI agents as part of the investigations because they had prior knowledge of the information that was leaked. (Under Justice regulations, any subpoena for news media phone records requires the "express authorization" of the attorney general. But a Justice Department spokeswoman did not respond Monday night when asked whether the attorney general had recused himself in the investigation.)

As another sign of the sensitivity of the case, CIA Director John Brennan disclosed earlier this year that he also had been questioned by FBI agents as part of the Yemen probe, but said he was later notified that he was not a subject of the investigation.

Bill Miller, spokesman for Machen, said in an email that the subpoena for the records was done by the book.

"Consistent with DOJ regulations, the department provided notification to the Associated Press of the receipt of toll records in a letter dated May 10, 2013," He noted that Justice regulations "do not require notification to the media prior to the issuance of legal process to obtain toll records."

In a separate email, Miller wrote: "We take seriously our obligations to follow all applicable laws, federal regulations, and Department of Justice policies when issuing subpoenas for phone records of media organizations. Those regulations require us to make every reasonable effort to obtain information through alternative means before even considering a subpoena for the phone records of a member of the media. We must notify the media organization in advance unless doing so would pose a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation.

"Because we value the freedom of the press, we are always careful and deliberative in seeking to strike the right balance between the public interest in the free flow of information and the public interest in the fair and effective administration of our criminal laws."

The regulations cited by Miller state that subpoenas for the news media in criminal cases should be done only when there are "reasonable grounds to believe ... that a crime has occurred" and that the records sought are "essential to a successful investigation." They also state that subpoenas should, wherever possible, "be directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter and "should cover a reasonably limited period of time and ... avoid requiring production of a large volume of unpublished material."

Since President Barack Obama took office, the Justice Department has aggressively pursued leak investigation and brought more criminal prosecutions – six in five years – than any previous administration. Those cases, which also have been sharply criticized by press groups, have also targeted reporters' phone records: James Risen, a national security reporter for the New York Times, had his phone, credit card and bank records subpoenaed as part of a Justice Department prosecution of a former CIA officer accused of leaking classified information on Iran's nuclear program to him.

But critics say the extensive nature of the subpoena for the AP phone records goes far beyond what was seen in earlier cases.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, vowed to investigate.

"This is obviously disturbing," he said. Coming in the wake of other disclosures about the administration's response to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the IRS's targeting of conservative nonprofit groups, he said it showed "top Obama administration officials increasingly see themselves as above the law and emboldened by the belief that they don't have to answer to anyone."

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he wanted to know more about the justification for the secret subpoena.

"The burden is always on the government when they go after private information -- especially information regarding the press or its confidential sources," he said. "... I am concerned that the government may not have met that burden. I am very troubled by these allegations and want to hear the government's explanation."

Anti-secrecy watchdogs also criticized the move.

"I've never heard of a dragnet collection effort against a media organization like this," said Stephen Aftergood, who tracks secrecy issues for the Federation of American Scientists. "This was not a targeted monitoring of an individual reporter. It's a sweeping collection of an entire bureau's communications."

"The Justice Department's seizure of the Associated Press' phone records is Nixonian," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a group that advocates on behalf of whistleblowers. "The American public deserves a full accounting of why and how this could happen."

NBC News' Capitol Hill Correspondent Kelly O'Donnell contributed to this report.

[derspiess]

  If you're not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to fear, right?

[CountDeMoney]

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, vowed to investigate.

"This is obviously disturbing," he said. Coming in the wake of other disclosures about the administration's response to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the IRS's targeting of conservative nonprofit groups, he said it showed "top Obama administration officials increasingly see themselves as above the law and emboldened by the belief that they don't have to answer to anyone."

Uh huh.  Hmmm...my memory is fuzzy, but...wait...it's coming back to me now...

Republican Lawmakers and Holder Spar Over Leak Investigation
June 12, 2012

Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday strongly criticized Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s recent decision to appoint two United States attorneys to investigate recent disclosures of classified national security information, saying the move was not enough and that he should appoint a special prosecutor.

At a committee hearing, the Republican senators — led by Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina — accused the administration of leaking the information and said that Mr. Holder was trying to shield the Obama administration from the scrutiny of a prosecutor who would be completely independent of the Justice Department.

Mr. Graham said that an excerpt recently published by The New York Times from the book "Confront and Conceal," by David Sanger, a Times correspondent, about cyberattacks by United States against Iran revealed that "there are clearly people around the president who are leaking stories that involve highly classified information."

"The concern we have is that you've got one program 'Fast and Furious' that has been an embarrassment for the administration and it's been like pulling teeth to get information about 'Fast and Furious, who did what and when, " he said, referring to Operation Fast and Furious, a bungled gun-trafficking case.

"But when you have programs on the national security front that seem to show the president as a strong leader, you read about it in the paper. So my concern I think is that a lot of us believe if there was ever a need for an outside special council, it is now. What do you say?"

Mr. Holder said that the two United States attorneys he appointed — Ronald C. Machen, the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, and Rod J. Rosenstein, his counterpart in Maryland — were exemplary prosecutors and like all federal authorities had the freedom to pursue the evidence wherever it may lead.

"I think you are missing something here," Mr. Holder said, but was interrupted by Mr. Graham.

"I think you are missing something here," Mr. Graham said in a stern tone. "I think you are missing the fact that this is a very big deal, and you are handling it in a way that creates suspicion where there should not be.

"And, all I'm asking for is for you to find a lawyer in this country that we all of could say — virtually all of us — could say that is the right person to do this job rather than you picking two people and telling us how great they are. I don't know these people from Adam's house cat."

Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, was particularly critical of Mr. Holder and called on him to resign for his handling of "Fast and Furious," the leak investigations and lack of leadership.

Mr. Holder said he would not resign.

Earlier in the hearing, Mr. Holder said that he was willing to make "compromises" with members of Congress about information they have subpoenaed about "Fast and Furious." Mr. Holder said that such a compromise would avoid "an impending constitutional crisis" if the House Oversight Committee votes on June 20 to recommend the full House hold Mr. Holder in contempt.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[11B4V]

Since President Barack Obama took office, the Justice Department has aggressively pursued leak investigation and brought more criminal prosecutions – six in five years – than any previous administration. Those cases, which also have been sharply criticized by press groups, have also targeted reporters' phone records: James Risen, a national security reporter for the New York Times, had his phone, credit card and bank records subpoenaed as part of a Justice Department prosecution of a former CIA officer accused of leaking classified information on Iran's nuclear program to him.

So is BO fucking with the press or holding the leakers accountable?

[merithyn]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It certainly seems so, doesn't it?

[derspiess]

Some of you guys are so in the tank for the Big O it's pathetic.

[merithyn]

Some of you guys are so in the tank for the Big O it's pathetic.

Coming from you, that's so rich....

[derspiess]

Some of you guys are so in the tank for the Big O it's pathetic.

Coming from you, that's so rich....

I'd actually love to find more upon which I could agree with him.  Gets tiring being in the opposition all the time. 

I guess I generally support his position on Syria, except for the foot-in-mouth red line part.  That could've been prevented

[grumbler]

Seems to me that if the judge - who is constitutionally the guy to make the call - approves the subpoenas, then the ire of the AP and the Congress ought to be directed towards him.  That's how checks and balances work.  Not that a congressman or senator would know much about that...

[AnchorClanker]

This administration is by all accounts from upper management (and my own observations) to be VERY tough on unauthorized disclosures of any kind.  They have been following up on infractions and violations in a manner I didn't see under Clinton or GWB, and the old timers say that it's actually tougher than under Poppa Bush and Reagan as well.   

[merithyn]

Some of you guys are so in the tank for the Big O it's pathetic.

Coming from you, that's so rich....

I'd actually love to find more upon which I could agree with him.  Gets tiring being in the opposition all the time. 

I guess I generally support his position on Syria, except for the foot-in-mouth red line part.  That could've been prevented

So you really don't see how that's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario? Seriously?

There are times that I have hope that you'll be able to break free of the Glenn Beck-chains that bind you, and then things like this come up.

[merithyn]

Seems to me that if the judge - who is constitutionally the guy to make the call - approves the subpoenas, then the ire of the AP and the Congress ought to be directed towards him.  That's how checks and balances work.  Not that a congressman or senator would know much about that...

That's what I was wondering. Is the assumption that the judge was "convinced" to issue the subpoena?

[DontSayBanana]

Seems to me that if the judge - who is constitutionally the guy to make the call - approves the subpoenas, then the ire of the AP and the Congress ought to be directed towards him.  That's how checks and balances work.  Not that a congressman or senator would know much about that...

Senators are congressmen; I think you meant "representative" there.

[garbon]

So you really don't see how that's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario? Seriously?

There are times that I have hope that you'll be able to break free of the Glenn Beck-chains that bind you, and then things like this come up.

I wonder if now Der is going to assign me to the Obama fan club.

[derspiess]

So you really don't see how that's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario? Seriously?

No, ma'am. Because it's not. Just about every time he does something I agree with he either changes course (as in Libya) or his narcissism gets in the way. I'd be thrilled to find things I can totally agree with or support him on. With Clinton as much as I opposed him I at least had welfare reform and NAFTA. There's Seedy's cue to invoke race.

There are times that I have hope that you'll be able to break free of the Glenn Beck-chains that bind you, and then things like this come up.

That was a bit of a cheap shot. I occasionally listen to Beck on my morning commute but only when Dan Patrick and Mike & Mike are talking about NBA or golf. And it's purely for entertainment. Sometimes I laugh with him, like when heand his two guys are being ssmart assessment and mocking the left. Sometimes I laugh at him, like when he brings up yet another conspiracy theory involving the Muslim Brotherhood. And sometimes I have to change the station, like when he goes into preaching mode or gets all bipolar.